Talk:She's American/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
I have become very familiar with this fantastic song after hearing it so much on the work playlist, so a review is my pleasure! --K. Peake 08:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Infobox and lead
[edit]Recording date is not sourced in the body; it is only said that they announced the album in 2015Done"and Americans, ultimately creating" → "and Americans, creating"Done"about what it means to be a British rockstar courting" → "about the nuances of a British rockstar courting" per the bodyDone
Should it be a direct copy of what is said in the body or is it better to reword and avoid repetition?Giacobbe talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Re-wording is preferable, but are you sure the above is an accurate way of doing so?--K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
The word "futuristic" is not notable in the lead for the synths Not done
- I disagree with you here. I believe it's an appropriate descriptor; simply saying the song contains synths seems vague. Giacobbe talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Yeah you are probably right actually, especially since this makes more sense than adding gooey here. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
"that incorporates elements of" → "with elements of"DoneAre you sure "frantic" is appropriate language for describing the romance reworded from comp?Done"attracted to things that" → "who is attracted to things that" to be specificDoneMerge the second para with the third, as the former is only two sentences longDone
Mine appears as four sentences. Merging them creates a nine sentence paragraph. Does this appear different for your viewer?Giacobbe talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I said second para with the third, not first; the second is only two sentences about comp/lyrics... that is too short.--K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Kyle Peake: Yes, I know what you meant, and you are correct in terms of sentences. While originally the paragraphs had 597, 391, and 638 characters, respectively, there is now a small 597-character first paragraph and a nearly double-sized 1,021-character second paragraph. Looks odd in my opinion, but you're the reviewer! Giacobbe talk 17:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
"Upon release, "She's American" received" → "Upon release, the song received"Done"who praised the song's" → "who praised the"Done"It reached number 176" → "The song reached number 176"Done"The song was later certified silver" → "It has been certified silver" since there is no mention of when the song charted here Not done
- Seems rather trivial to change. It was released, and then certified at a later date. Giacobbe talk 18:22, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
With the upon release part being earlier in this para, I believe things are fine like this actually. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
The iconography part is not mentioned in the music video section; either replace with Healy dancing in front of a video screen or source itDone
Background and development
[edit]Surround the ellipsis by [] on the quote box,plus wikilink tongue-in-cheek and pipe rock to Rock musicPartly done
- Are you sure about the ellipsis? Per MOS guidelines: "When an ellipsis (...) is used to indicate that material is removed from a direct quotation, it should not normally be bracketed". I just recently learned of this myself. Giacobbe talk 18:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Oh sorry I never saw this guideline, no change needed after all! --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't think [4] is needed because unlike "Love Me", there is succeeding prose to back up commercial successDone"referring to fixing his teeth and whether that was" → "that refers to fixing his teeth and if it was"DonePipe rock to Rock musicDone"and told the interviewer:" → "telling the interviewer:"Done"was officially released by" → "was released by" because "officially" is pointless when you mention the labelsDoneRemove the release date from the end of the sentence, as it is already at the startDone
Music and lyrics
[edit]- Audio sample text looks good!
"of four minutes and 30 seconds" → "of 4 minutes and 30 seconds" per MOS:NUM on comparative valuesDoneDoes the part about funk guitar licks refer to licks of that guitar type or guitar licks that are classified as the funk genre? If the former, wikilink funk guitar per MOS:LINK2SECT.Done
- I'm not exactly sure, can't hurt to link it though. Giacobbe talk 18:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Only the solo part should be kept for the saxophone, as one source says about "a rogue saxophone" and the other mentions a saxophone cameo on the songDone"warning of mistaking the "frenzy" of the moment" → "warning of mistaking the moment" per none of the sources mentioning any frenzyDone
- I had it sourced somewhere, but I can't be bothered to go through them all again. Giacobbe talk 18:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Shouldn't [22] be solely at the end of the sentence before [29]?Done
Reception
[edit]Pipe John Hughes to John Hughes (filmmaker)Done"and said it" → "and said the song"Done
Are you sure this isn't too much repetition? The word "song" is already used earlier in the sentence.Giacobbe talk 18:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Write "the track" here then, as "it" has been used earlier in the sentence.--K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Italicise The VergeDone"Writing for Idobi," → "Writing for idobi,"DoneRemove or replace The Red & Black per WP:RSSM Not done
- Per WP:RSSM: "They can sometimes be considered reliable on other topics, although professional sources are typically preferred when available." Given that it is independent from the university (and therefore isn't subject to undue influence or bias), is award-winning, and has operated for 128 years, its inclusion seems fine. Giacobbe talk 19:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Oh right this does make sense then, particularly when you take into context that it is only used for reception. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
"Following the release of the track's parent album," → "Following the release of I Like It When You Sleep, for You Are So Beautiful yet So Unaware of It,"Done"the 1975 are successful" → "Healy is successful" per the sourceDone"The Irish Times's Lauren Murphy" → "The Irish Times' Lauren Murphy" for correct grammarDone"but lack conviction and sound too much" → "but lack[s] conviction and sound[s] too much" plus put at least some of the rest of this quote in your own words per WP:QUOTEFARM and to focus on the song rather than the groupDoneNot too sure about The Harvard Crimson since it is said at WP:RSSM that reputable student outlets like this "can sometimes be considered reliable on other topics, although professional sources are typically preferred when available". Any comments regarding the usage?
I've used it in several other articles with no issue. Giacobbe talk 19:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
"on the US Billboard Hot Rock & Alternative Songs." → "on the US Billboard Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart."Done
Music video
[edit]Retitle to Cancelled music videoDoneRemove "for "She's American"" after the accompanying music video part, as the implication is that it was set to accompany the songDone- Are you sure the first sentence's info is in the correct place, or should it be swapped with the second sentence for chronological order?
- It already is in chronological order, no? The band announced the video would be released on Christmas day, and later recanted their statements ("... decided to release a music video for 'Loving Someone' next - instead of 'She's American' as originally planned").
- Added "however", since the announcement of the "She's American" video occurred before the change in release dates. Giacobbe talk 17:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Pipe Christmas Day to ChristmasDone- "manager, Jamie Osborn, revealed that a visual for" → "manager Jamie Osborn revealed that
a visual for fellow album track"Partly done
- Is this a personal stylistic preference or is there a rule for this? The generally accepted format with vocative commas is to either use one before and after the name, or omit both altogether. Both styles are grammatically correct. Giacobbe talk 19:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- From my experience, it seems that commas are only used for names that serve roles in the lead, so the suggestion would be preferable. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- It is grammatically incorrect: "Vocatives should always be used with commas... use a comma before and after a vocative in the middle of the sentence". More explanation here, here, and here. Giacobbe talk 17:34, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
"Numerous teaser clips from" → "Numerous teaser clips for"Done"worked on the set." → "worked on the shoot."Done"was not released." → "was ultimately not released."Done"that it would not" → "that it would likely not" per the source, but is this being after the not released sentence the correct order?Done"Healy Tweeted an" → "Healy tweeted an"Done"while the song played in" → "while the song plays in" for correct tenseDone- The last sentence of this para is mentioning it not being released again, plus are you sure the speculation isn't WP:TRIVIA? Partly done
- Reworded a portion of the sentence. In regards to your second question; yes, per the source: "Are The 1975 finally releasing the ‘She’s American’ video?" Giacobbe talk 19:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Not sure why you believe this is trivial. He began teasing the video again, fuelling speculation of its release per the sources own words: "
It looks like The 1975 could finally drop their ‘She’s American’ video, two years after it was initially set to debut
". Giacobbe talk 18:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Not sure why you believe this is trivial. He began teasing the video again, fuelling speculation of its release per the sources own words: "
Credits and personnel
[edit]Add this section, especially since there is a sufficient amount of writers and producers to warrant itDone
Good catch!! Don't know how I forgot to add that. Giacobbe talk 19:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Charts
[edit]Why do the brackets say 2016-17 when all of the peaks were in the former year?Done
Certifications
[edit]- Good
References
[edit]- Copyvio score appears too high at 47.1% for the Stereogum ref, but that is led to in a good part by the album's title so this is not a problem really
To fix the cite error with ref 1, invoke it using the ref name on the second instanceDoneAuthor-link Annie Zaleski on ref 21DoneIdobi → idobi on ref 24DoneCite Idolator as work/website instead for ref 31DoneWP:OVERLINK of The Skinny on ref 33DoneRemove or replace ref 35 per WP:RSSMCite Zobbel.de instead of Official Charts Company for ref 41 and do so as work/website instead since the source is only showing charts and isn't actually part of OCC officiallyDone
External links
[edit]- Good
Final comments and verdict
[edit]- On hold until all of the issues are fixed, after blasting through a review of this brilliant soon-to-be-GA track! --K. Peake 16:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Kyle Peake: Glad to hear you enjoyed the song!! A highlight from a stellar album. Giacobbe talk 19:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- (CA)Giacobbe I have gone over where things still need fixing properly, while crossing out any comments I was mistaken on that you had explained not implementing. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Kyle Peake: I believe I've corrected/addressed your remaining comments. Giacobbe talk 18:05, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- (CA)Giacobbe ✓ Pass now, the only remaining issue was with the second para being too long in comparison to the first but I moved the first sentence to fix that for you! --K. Peake 07:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.